Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Fri, 18 Sep 2020 17:03:58 +0100
From:   Alessio Balsini <balsini@android.com>
To:     Antonio SJ Musumeci <trapexit@spawn.link>
Cc:     Alessio Balsini <balsini@android.com>,
        Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu>,
        Akilesh Kailash <akailash@google.com>,
        Amir Goldstein <amir73il@gmail.com>,
        David Anderson <dvander@google.com>,
        Eric Yan <eric.yan@oneplus.com>, Jann Horn <jannh@google.com>,
        Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>,
        Martijn Coenen <maco@android.com>,
        Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@dabbelt.com>,
        Paul Lawrence <paullawrence@google.com>,
        Stefano Duo <stefanoduo@google.com>,
        Zimuzo Ezeozue <zezeozue@google.com>,
        fuse-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, kernel-team@android.com,
        linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [fuse-devel] [PATCH V8 0/3] fuse: Add support for passthrough
 read/write
Message-ID: <20200918160358.GA3385065@google.com>
References: <20200911163403.79505-1-balsini@android.com>
 <21e1b3be-6cc1-c73a-4e3e-963e2dd64f1f@spawn.link>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <21e1b3be-6cc1-c73a-4e3e-963e2dd64f1f@spawn.link>
Precedence: bulk

Hi Antonio,

It's indeed a great idea to notify the FUSE daemon in case of lower file
system exceptions, otherwise transparent when passthrough is enabled.
I was already planning to work on this feature as a future extension, glad
to see that this is of interest to the community.

Thanks for your feedback,
Alessio

On Fri, Sep 11, 2020 at 02:46:04PM -0400, Antonio SJ Musumeci wrote:
> On 9/11/2020 12:34 PM, Alessio Balsini via fuse-devel wrote:
> > Add support for file system passthrough read/write of files when enabled in
> > userspace through the option FUSE_PASSTHROUGH.
> Might be more effort than it is worth but any thoughts on userland error
> handling for passthrough? My use case, optionally, responds to read or write
> errors in particular ways. It's not an unreasonable tradeoff to disable
> passthrough if the user wants those features but was wondering if there was
> any consideration of extending the protocol to pass read/write errors back
> to the fuse server.